BingX.com Faces Allegations of Fraud and Unfair Trading

Introduction

As the cryptocurrency market expands, scrutiny of digital trading platforms intensifies. BingX.com, established in 2017 and marketed as a leading social trading platform, has gained attention for its innovative copytrading solutions and high-profile partnerships, such as its sponsorship of Chelsea FC. However, beneath its polished branding and claims of transparency, a troubling pattern of consumer complaints, allegations of unfair practices, and potential financial risks has surfaced. We conducted a thorough investigation into BingX.com, utilizing open-source intelligence (OSINT), consumer reviews, and adverse media reports, with a particular focus on Trustpilot reviews . Our findings reveal significant concerns about consumer protection, operational transparency, and reputational risks that demand closer examination.

This report synthesizes user experiences, scam allegations, regulatory concerns, and adverse media to provide a comprehensive risk assessment of BingX.com. We aim to inform potential users, investors, and regulators about the platform’s practices and the potential dangers of engaging with it.

Methodology

Our investigation employed a multi-faceted approach to assess BingX.com’s operations and reputation. We gathered publicly available data from BingX’s official website, social media profiles, and third-party platforms like CoinMarketCap and CertiK. We analyzed 631 Trustpilot reviews, focusing on 1-star ratings to identify recurring complaints and patterns of dissatisfaction. We scoured news articles, regulatory filings, and online forums for reports of lawsuits, sanctions, or criminal proceedings. We evaluated BingX’s claims of regulatory adherence in jurisdictions like Canada, the EU, and Australia. We examined user-submitted complaints, including account UIDs, to verify authenticity and cross-reference with BingX’s responses. All findings adhere to Google’s SEO ethical guidelines, ensuring accuracy, transparency, and unbiased reporting.

Background on BingX.com

BingX, launched in 2017, positions itself as a premier cryptocurrency exchange specializing in social trading and copytrading. According to its website, it ranks among the top 10 crypto derivative exchanges (per CoinMarketCap data as of 2022) and serves over 1 million users globally with hundreds of spot trading pairs. BingX emphasizes security, transparency, and user protection, highlighting partnerships with cybersecurity firms like CertiK and compliance with Know Your Customer (KYC) protocols via Sumsub. The platform claims to maintain a 100% Proof-of-Reserves and a $150 million Shield Fund to protect users during market volatility.

Despite these assurances, our investigation uncovered a stark contrast between BingX’s public image and user experiences, particularly in consumer protection and operational transparency.

Key Findings: Consumer Complaints and Red Flags

Flash Crash Liquidation Issues

A recurring theme in Trustpilot reviews is the platform’s handling of flash crashes, particularly a significant Solana (SOL) crash on October 11, 2025. Multiple users reported substantial losses due to automatic liquidations during extreme market volatility. A user (UID: 27945887) on October 15, 2025, reported losing $8,000 in collateral from 12 SOL-backed loans during a five-minute price drop from $210 to $172. They claimed BingX’s “multi-level risk control mechanism” and “BingX Shield” failed to prevent erroneous liquidations, despite assurances of user protection. The user noted that the price wick to $142 was unique to BingX and not reflected on other major exchanges like Binance or Coinbase. Another user on October 17, 2025, echoed similar concerns, alleging their loans were liquidated at prices below BingX’s recorded minimum, contradicting the platform’s risk management claims. They reported notifying the Financial Services Authority (FSA) of Seychelles and VARA in Dubai, indicating potential regulatory escalation.

The failure to activate protective mechanisms during flash crashes raises questions about the efficacy of BingX’s risk management systems. The platform’s responses, often citing “normal business processes,” appear dismissive and fail to address discrepancies in price execution.

Account Restrictions and Freezing

Numerous users reported sudden account restrictions without clear explanations, particularly when engaging in profitable trading or using the BingX API. On August 22, 2025, a user (UID: 32868522) claimed their account was restricted for “anomalous activity” after successful automated trading via the API. BingX provided vague responses, citing sensitive security strategies without transparency. On October 21, 2025, another user (UID: 32665011) reported their account was restricted from trading despite compliance with platform rules. They offered to provide verification but received only automated responses, highlighting poor customer service.

The pattern of account restrictions, especially targeting profitable traders, suggests potential manipulation to limit user gains. The lack of transparent communication undermines BingX’s claims of fairness.

Pricing Discrepancies and Financial Losses

Several reviews highlighted significant pricing issues, particularly with low-liquidity tokens. On September 1, 2025, a user purchased the WLFI token at $2.8 on BingX, while it traded below $0.5 on Binance and Bybit, resulting in a 90% loss. BingX offered a 20 USDT voucher as compensation, which the user deemed inadequate. On September 20, 2025, another user (UID: 26970368) reported a similar issue with WLFI, noting BingX’s lack of follow-up after promising an investigation.

These incidents point to flaws in BingX’s index pricing system and liquidity management, which can lead to substantial user losses. The platform’s minimal compensation efforts further erode trust.

Poor Customer Service and Evasive Responses

Users consistently criticized BingX’s customer support for being unresponsive, generic, or evasive. On October 24, 2025, a user described a “pattern of deliberate obstruction” after their requests for technical records were ignored, and their case was reassigned to cause delays. On August 11, 2025, a user (UID: SID27674067) reported a blocked withdrawal despite completing KYC, with support providing only generic replies.

BingX’s customer service appears ill-equipped to handle complex issues, often relying on automated responses or minimal gestures like vouchers, which do not address user losses adequately.

Allegations of Fraud and Scams

Some users labeled BingX as a “scam exchange,” citing frozen accounts and inaccessible funds. On September 2, 2025, a user claimed their account was deleted after depositing 5,700 USDT, with support demanding proof of deposit (TXID) they no longer had. On September 5, 2025, another user reported their account was frozen after claiming a 10$ ETH voucher, with support offering no resolution.

Allegations of fund misappropriation and account deletions without justification raise serious concerns about BingX’s integrity and compliance with anti-money laundering (AML) regulations.

Regulatory and Compliance Concerns

BingX claims to be a regulated entity with offices in Canada, the EU, and Australia, adhering to KYC and AML standards. However, users reported notifying regulators like the FSA of Seychelles and VARA, suggesting potential non-compliance. On October 17, 2025, a user escalated their case to regulatory authorities, citing BingX’s failure to protect users during the SOL flash crash. BingX’s TrustScore of 1.9/5, based on 631 reviews, reflects widespread dissatisfaction, with 97% of negative reviews receiving responses—often generic or insufficient.

The absence of public records confirming BingX’s regulatory licenses in claimed jurisdictions raises doubts about its compliance framework. Escalations to regulators indicate potential oversight gaps.

Adverse Media and OSINT Analysis

Our search for adverse media revealed limited mainstream coverage of BingX, possibly due to its niche presence compared to larger exchanges like Binance or Coinbase. However, online forums and social media platforms, including X, highlighted similar user complaints about account restrictions, pricing issues, and poor support. No formal lawsuits, criminal proceedings, or sanctions were identified, but the volume of consumer complaints on Trustpilot and other platforms suggests reputational risks.

BingX’s partnerships, such as with Chelsea FC and CertiK, lend credibility, but these affiliations do not directly address user grievances. The platform’s Proof-of-Reserves claim and $150 million Shield Fund are marketed as protective measures, yet user experiences during flash crashes indicate these safeguards may be ineffective or selectively applied.

Risk Assessment

Consumer Protection Risks

BingX poses significant risks to consumer funds due to its failure to protect users during flash crashes and inadequate compensation for losses. The platform’s pricing discrepancies for low-liquidity tokens can lead to catastrophic financial losses, as seen in the WLFI token cases. Users should verify token prices across multiple exchanges, avoid market orders on low-liquidity assets, and be prepared for potential regulatory escalation in unresolved disputes.

Scam and Fraud Risks

Allegations of account deletions, frozen funds, and restricted withdrawals suggest potential fraudulent practices, warranting a moderate to high risk rating. The lack of transparency in handling these cases fuels scam accusations. Users should maintain transaction records (e.g., TXIDs), complete KYC promptly, and consider engaging with exchanges that have stronger regulatory oversight.

Financial Fraud Investigation

While no confirmed criminal proceedings were found, the pattern of account restrictions targeting profitable traders raises suspicions of manipulative practices. BingX’s vague responses to “anomalous activity” claims lack accountability, indicating a moderate risk of financial fraud. Regulatory bodies like the FSA and VARA should investigate BingX’s risk control policies and liquidation processes for compliance with financial regulations.

Reputational Risks

BingX’s low TrustScore and consistent negative reviews pose high reputational risks, potentially deterring new users and attracting regulatory scrutiny. To mitigate these risks, BingX must improve customer service, enhance transparency in pricing and risk management, and address user losses promptly to rebuild trust.

BingX’s Responses and Accountability

BingX responds to 97% of negative Trustpilot reviews, typically within 48 hours. However, these responses often lack substance, offering generic assurances or requesting user IDs without follow-through. In the WLFI token case (UID: 26970368), BingX promised an investigation but failed to provide updates, reinforcing perceptions of evasion. The platform’s reliance on minimal compensation, such as 20 USDT vouchers, for significant losses further damages its reputation.

Expert Opinion: Conclusion

Our investigation into BingX.com reveals a troubling disconnect between its marketed promises of transparency, security, and user protection and the reality faced by its users. The platform’s handling of flash crashes, account restrictions, and pricing discrepancies highlights systemic issues in risk management and customer support. While BingX’s partnerships and Proof-of-Reserves claims project an image of reliability, the volume of consumer complaints—particularly those involving substantial financial losses—suggests operational and ethical shortcomings.

From a consumer protection standpoint, BingX poses significant risks due to its failure to safeguard users during volatile market events and its inadequate resolution processes. Allegations of fraud, while unconfirmed by legal action, warrant further scrutiny from regulators, especially given reports of escalation to authorities like the FSA and VARA. The platform’s low TrustScore and consistent negative feedback underscore reputational vulnerabilities that could impact its long-term viability.

We recommend that potential users exercise extreme caution when engaging with BingX.com. Verify token prices across multiple platforms, maintain detailed transaction records, and be prepared for potential account restrictions or delays in dispute resolution. Regulators should investigate BingX’s compliance with financial regulations, particularly its risk control mechanisms and liquidation processes, to ensure user protection.

Until BingX addresses these red flags with meaningful reforms—such as transparent pricing, robust risk management, and responsive customer service—it remains a high-risk platform for cryptocurrency traders. The financial world demands integrity, and BingX must rise to meet that standard or face further reputational and regulatory consequences.

Written by

Finn Morgan

Updated

2 months ago

As a Cyber Security Analyst, I focus on uncovering and mitigating online scams, fraudulent schemes, and cybercrime operations. I’m passionate about using data-driven analysis and intelligence to protect users and organizations from emerging digital risks.